Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Seeing as I also play SM, and of all the things you listed, only own one StormTalon, dismissing me as just an Eldar player seems off.

BA aren't fine compared to Eldar. I really don't think I have ever said that.

All the changes to SM stuff that BA have too will clearly transfer to BA. And for custom stuff, Zag will obviously try to balance them.

My comments on Chapter Tactics were about Chapter Tactics. I was trying to compare the differences between units that both use - Tacs, ASMs, Rhinos, etc - to try to get to a baseline for what BA need.

In that regard, things like SM Tacs getting Grav Guns and pistols as an option vs BA Tacs getting Hand Flamers (and do they get Infernus Pistols?) should probably factor in. I'd think we'd want SM Tacs/Devs/ASMs to be roughly equal, but somewhat different. I was considering the whole of the differences in those respects to be effectively Chapter Tactics.

Things like Tiggy, Cents, TFC, etc versus Dante, Sanguinary Guard, etc I'd rather not fully factor into Chapter Tactics. Sure, BA get the short end RAW right now. I assumed Zag would address them, and hoped he'd do it without making one side's standard Battle Company stuff better than the other.

Sorry if it can across as sounding like 'BA need nerfs'. Not my intent. My post was short sighted.

Two potential sticking points are ASM specials and fast vehicles. I'd think ASM specials would be considered part of chapter flavor, and possibly chapter tactics, but i can see the counterargument (3xMelta Pods aren't the same as a skirmisher ASM squad). As for Fast vehicles, seems to be in the same vein as IWND vehicles or getting to Scout because the unit inside has Scout. For "free" would be too much, but I don't know how much it'd cost.

I don't really care if other chapters have melta or not on ASMs, because it's not really making BA ASMs good, because melta is not that good anymore. Only when you get lucky vs high value vehicles. Melta is total crap against MCs due to poor range and lack of ROF. All the things BA DO get, I'm fine with everyone having them, because they aren't doing us any good as it is. Chapter flavor doesn't matter when it's a big ball of fail.

I would love Melta on my ASMs, but it feels like a BA thing to me.

I hope I'm not just channeling the ' BA are the ASM chapter' concept, because that was terrible.

BAs do need to not be a big ball of fail. What that entails is a very complex question. Most of the top end has been toned down. Most of the Battle Company stuff has also received minor buffs. Hopefully the right balance can be hit. I hope their Tacs aren't buffed into strictly-superior just to balance out things like Storm Talons and TFCs. That balance should, IMO, come elsewhere.

Martel732 wrote:
I wasn't referring to you with that, but rather, Bharring's comments.

DS is risky, but with no real pay off. That's why I never do it without a drop pod.

Sorry for being hostile, but Bharring's non-chalant attitude of everything being fine in BA land is really grating. Especially from an Eldar player. Who basically flop themselves onto the board with whatever units and win against BA.

I disagree, DS can have a large payoff, but it needs to be done well and is not without risk. Having something that allows BA to mitigate risk helps. There are definitely places and times where DSing can be extremely influential, and other times DSing is foolish and you are better off just deploying. But, 17pt assault marines with cheaper specials and upgrades aren't poorly prices, and definitely get better when the rest of the codices are rebalanced.


I didn't read the same attitude that you seemed to about BA from Bharring. BA need balancing, no one is arguing that, but we also have to look at everything in context of the Erratas for each army. And comparing something to the old Gold Standard autotakes doesn't work as many of those got knocked down a bit, or don't work as well do to other things being rebalanced as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:Seeing as I also play SM, and of all the things you listed, only own one StormTalon, dismissing me as just an Eldar player seems off.

BA aren't fine compared to Eldar. I really don't think I have ever said that.

All the changes to SM stuff that BA have too will clearly transfer to BA. And for custom stuff, Zag will obviously try to balance them.

My comments on Chapter Tactics were about Chapter Tactics. I was trying to compare the differences between units that both use - Tacs, ASMs, Rhinos, etc - to try to get to a baseline for what BA need.

In that regard, things like SM Tacs getting Grav Guns and pistols as an option vs BA Tacs getting Hand Flamers (and do they get Infernus Pistols?) should probably factor in. I'd think we'd want SM Tacs/Devs/ASMs to be roughly equal, but somewhat different. I was considering the whole of the differences in those respects to be effectively Chapter Tactics.

Things like Tiggy, Cents, TFC, etc versus Dante, Sanguinary Guard, etc I'd rather not fully factor into Chapter Tactics. Sure, BA get the short end RAW right now. I assumed Zag would address them, and hoped he'd do it without making one side's standard Battle Company stuff better than the other.

Sorry if it can across as sounding like 'BA need nerfs'. Not my intent. My post was short sighted.

Two potential sticking points are ASM specials and fast vehicles. I'd think ASM specials would be considered part of chapter flavor, and possibly chapter tactics, but i can see the counterargument (3xMelta Pods aren't the same as a skirmisher ASM squad). As for Fast vehicles, seems to be in the same vein as IWND vehicles or getting to Scout because the unit inside has Scout. For "free" would be too much, but I don't know how much it'd cost.

I completely agree and this is largely how I am looking at it. Using the lightest hand to bring the most balance. As it stand, Furious Charge is not equivelant to Chapter Tactics, at least some of them. Which reminds me, some Chapter Tactics could use a little boost or more re-balancing. I initially only focused on bringing White Scars down a bit.

I think posts were just being taken out of context there for a bit, we all think the same things need to be addressed, but were referring to changes in different contexts. No worries for anyone.

Martel732 wrote:I don't really care if other chapters have melta or not on ASMs, because it's not really making BA ASMs good, because melta is not that good anymore. Only when you get lucky vs high value vehicles. Melta is total crap against MCs due to poor range and lack of ROF. All the things BA DO get, I'm fine with everyone having them, because they aren't doing us any good as it is. Chapter flavor doesn't matter when it's a big ball of fail.

Melta still has its place. Sure, its not as strong as it was before, but that was a former meta where vehicles were too strong and Melta was too good against them in response. It still is a High Strength low AP weapon that hurts everything. It doesn't have a great rate of Fire, but it is still a solid weapon for 10pts.

Chapter Flavor won't be a big ball of fail, and I think your criticisms are a bit harsh and colored by a years of BA being crapped on. I mean they had theie six months in 5th where they were Marines +1 and dominated.... and then GK ie BA+1 did everything they did but better and really was imbalanced. Then 6th Happened and BA got much much worse, then SM got somewhat better, but got new imbalanced units and combinations where BA suffered further... then 7th happened and BA really suffered more until their 7th Ed Codex dropped and it was a gaint lemon.

I have no doubt its possible to re-balance BA, give them some flavor, and make them roughly an equal but different and flavorful option to normal SM.

Bharring wrote:I would love Melta on my ASMs, but it feels like a BA thing to me.

I hope I'm not just channeling the ' BA are the ASM chapter' concept, because that was terrible.

BAs do need to not be a big ball of fail. What that entails is a very complex question. Most of the top end has been toned down. Most of the Battle Company stuff has also received minor buffs. Hopefully the right balance can be hit. I hope their Tacs aren't buffed into strictly-superior just to balance out things like Storm Talons and TFCs. That balance should, IMO, come elsewhere.

That is exactly what I am intending to do. Creating BA buffs, Furious Charge + Something that doesn't overpower the shared units, but doesn't leave them lacking like just FC does now against some other Chapter Tactics. Its tough to find the right balance, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. And things like Storm Talons, Centurions, and TFCs need to be balanced out by the unique options and units that BA receive and I think there are plenty of opportunity to do this.

Sanguinary guard, for example, are super frustrating because on paper they are really good, but in practice, AP 2 weapons just end up owning them. Really badly.

This is because players are savvy and most bring a solid mix of ROF wound spam and cheap AP2 just in case there is something like a Dreadknight that needs killing. At least, those players that are playing lists that can do this.

Marines really struggle with high S wound spam, but can bring plenty of AP 2, albeit short range. But unfortunately for Sang Guard, they have to get to short range.

Come to think of it, Sang Guard suck compared to say, Broadsides, another 2+ armor unit for the same reason the Dreadknight is child's play compared to a Riptide. Units that are only effective at short range have to charge into all the most deadly weapons in the game, while long range units have to contend with very few threats.

So how to price this unit? Use its "on paper" value, or its value as the game is actually played? As they stand now, I would never use this unit because they are just going to get smoked.

"I have no doubt its possible to re-balance BA, give them some flavor, and make them roughly an equal but different and flavorful option to normal SM. "

I'm glad someone thinks this, because charging expensive models at gun lines, or worse, mobile heavy weapon platforms, in a futile attempt to get into assault range is the current BA job description. BA firepower is poor, because melta is now poor, so transports are also a serious problem. Yes, you can use them other ways, and that's when we get into C:SM -1 or C:SM -2 territory.

Martel732 wrote:
Sanguinary guard, for example, are super frustrating because on paper they are really good, but in practice, AP 2 weapons just end up owning them. Really badly.

This is because players are savvy and most bring a solid mix of ROF wound spam and cheap AP2 just in case there is something like a Dreadknight that needs killing. At least, those players that are playing lists that can do this.

Marines really struggle with high S wound spam, but can bring plenty of AP 2, albeit short range. But unfortunately for Sang Guard, they have to get to short range.

Come to think of it, Sang Guard suck compared to say, Broadsides, another 2+ armor unit for the same reason the Dreadknight is child's play compared to a Riptide. Units that are only effective at short range have to charge into all the most deadly weapons in the game, while long range units have to contend with very few threats.

So how to price this unit? Use its "on paper" value, or its value as the game is actually played? As they stand now, I would never use this unit because they are just going to get smoked.

"I have no doubt its possible to re-balance BA, give them some flavor, and make them roughly an equal but different and flavorful option to normal SM. "

I'm glad someone thinks this, because charging expensive models at gun lines, or worse, mobile heavy weapon platforms, in a futile attempt to get into assault range is the current BA job description. BA firepower is poor, because melta is now poor, so transports are also a serious problem. Yes, you can use them other ways, and that's when we get into C:SM -1 or C:SM -2 territory.

Looking at Sanguinary Guard I would say the are costed ~3-5pts/model too high. Angellus is not much better than a Bolter, sure its AP4 but no 24" option and probably equivalent to a Storm Bolter. They have a Master Crafted Two handed Power Weapon each, which has been overvalued just as all PWs had been. Their Pistols should be 7pts/each as well. Maybe the Chapter Banner should be 20pts.

Sang Guard to Broadsides is a bad comparision, but function in wholey different roles. But, I'll run with this, if you head over to Tau, you'll see that Broadsides got more expensive for HYMP. And when my BA Errata is done, you'll see Sang Guard get cheaper. Head over the Riptides and you'll its has been rebalanced, the IA Riptide is no longer AP 2, except when NOVA charging and costs a bit more. The Dreadknight is actually quite well balanced, maybe some of its weapons are expensive, but its chassis is just right. Sang Guard's short range can be mitigated by DS, but when you are fielding models you've paid too much for and getting shot by firepwoer that someone has paid too little for it makes a big difference. This is less an inherent imbalance, and more an issue that is being addressed by my Errata. You keep looking at things in comparison to the Gold standard of other armies, Tau's Gold standard took a big hit, just roll over and look at their Errata, or look at the hit Eldar and see that when properly costed the situation is not as dire as you are framing it as.

The paper value of Sang Guard was wrong, and it was even worse las dex. Just like the paper value for Terminators has been wrong since 4th Ed, they simply weren't worth 40pts base. Sang gaurd were basically paying almost 2.5x marines cost for 2x durability against small arms only, 1x durability vs AP2, being Jump Infantry, a Power Weapon, Fearless, and having a unique but different Special Weapon loadout. VS ASM they were double the cost for a power WEapon and twice as much small arms firepower, fearless and the 2+ which was 2x or 1x durability. And with that many few models their close combat power with attacks was severely lacking. Special access was arguably worse. They simply put were miscosted.

Their paper cost is not that great, things need to be taken into context and they paid too much for a lot of their toys. I'm confident that I can fix Sanguinary Guard with a simple points adjustment.

I'm glad someone thinks this, because charging Overcosted models at gun lines, or worse, mobile Undercostedheavy weapon platforms, in a futile attempt to get into assault range is the current BA job description.

There, fixed that sentence for you. Propperly balancing both sides yields a huge improvement to the situation. It won't be perfect, but it certainly will by significantly better.

Got any more units you'd like to look at, we can do them one at a time.

It's hard for me, because all I ever take on are gold standards.

Martel732 wrote:
It's hard for me, because all I ever take on are gold standards.

Of course it is, and that is the exact point of this Balance Errata project. If you give your opponents the Errata for their army while useing the Errata for your army and play with the few minor alteration in the general Balance Errata, you will be playing a much more balanced game.

GW is terrible at balance, and the Gold Standards are generally the most overpowered or undercosted options, or most easily abuse the rules or unintended rules combinations.

Use my Balance Errata, and your games will be much better. I'm confident of that.

I guess we should do an inventory of what BA lose and gain, but that probably belongs in the actual BA thread. Protip: even with your changes to grav cents, they are still better than any BA special unit by a long shot.

Martel732 wrote:
I guess we should do an inventory of what BA lose and gain, but that probably belongs in the actual BA thread. Protip: even with your changes to grav cents, they are still better than any BA special unit by a long shot.

This will be the BA thread. One entire thread per Dex was anusive to the forum, so I decided to group them as best as I could. IoM PA guys got this thread, plus their discussions are relevant to each other.

Grav Cents aren't bad when the aren't stuck in borrowed Pods or in a Cent Star.

Grav Cents are 5pts cheaper(Searent Upgrade) but have lost 20% of their firepower. They no longer can borrow pods due to BB being Allies of Convenience. The only star that is left is Tiggy, or other Libbies. The need Gate, so that means no Invisibikity. No Gate Driago Tank. And Tiggy costs 20pts more. That has gone a very long way to balancing Grav Cents.

 Zagman wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I guess we should do an inventory of what BA lose and gain, but that probably belongs in the actual BA thread. Protip: even with your changes to grav cents, they are still better than any BA special unit by a long shot.

This will be the BA thread. One entire thread per Dex was anusive to the forum, so I decided to group them as best as I could. IoM PA guys got this thread, plus their discussions are relevant to each other.

Grav Cents aren't bad when the aren't stuck in borrowed Pods or in a Cent Star.

Grav Cents are 5pts cheaper(Searent Upgrade) but have lost 20% of their firepower. They no longer can borrow pods due to BB being Allies of Convenience. The only star that is left is Tiggy, or other Libbies. The need Gate, so that means no Invisibikity. No Gate Driago Tank. And Tiggy costs 20pts more. That has gone a very long way to balancing Grav Cents.

I understand that, but they are still way better than DC, Sang Guard, Furiosos and the like.

Martel732 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I guess we should do an inventory of what BA lose and gain, but that probably belongs in the actual BA thread. Protip: even with your changes to grav cents, they are still better than any BA special unit by a long shot.

This will be the BA thread. One entire thread per Dex was anusive to the forum, so I decided to group them as best as I could. IoM PA guys got this thread, plus their discussions are relevant to each other.

Grav Cents aren't bad when the aren't stuck in borrowed Pods or in a Cent Star.

Grav Cents are 5pts cheaper(Searent Upgrade) but have lost 20% of their firepower. They no longer can borrow pods due to BB being Allies of Convenience. The only star that is left is Tiggy, or other Libbies. The need Gate, so that means no Invisibikity. No Gate Driago Tank. And Tiggy costs 20pts more. That has gone a very long way to balancing Grav Cents.

I understand that, but they are still way better than DC, Sang Guard, Furiosos and the like.

Have you played against Footslogging Grav Cents? They really aren't anything special on the table, especially if you don't feed them. Now if you give them prime targets in range without aloha striking you, sure, they'll hurt you, but they are quite balanced. It was only when they were in Pods or in Cent Stars that they became a problem... Well that one time they got outflanked in a Whit Scars list in Hammer and Anvil... But that's another story, it hurt. They control an area of the board, but can be countered through movement, and they can be killed. A single good alpha strike could take out most of them. I'd rather have Lascannon Missile Launcher Cents I instead if they are Footslogging it.

DC are great but fulfill a different role. Sang Guard are currently over costed, Furiososmare pretty solid, but fulfill different roles. Hard to do direct comparisons.

I have actually NEVER seen a footslogging grav cent. Actually, I can't remember the last time I took on a non-invis grav star. I really hate that forge world arse hole librarian.

"Hard to do direct comparisons."

But we have to, because we have to consider what BA gain and lose vis a vis vanilla marines.

Martel732 wrote:
I have actually NEVER seen a footslogging grav cent. Actually, I can't remember the last time I took on a non-invis grav star. I really hate that forge world arse hole librarian.

"Hard to do direct comparisons."

But we have to, because we have to consider what BA gain and lose vis a vis vanilla marines.

Exactly, my point is that you were facing...
A. A broken rule Invisibility. Which has been fixed.
B. A Broken combination, Loth +other. My fix doesn't include Forgeworld, but when he gets addressed he'll be fixed. Picking your powers should cost a premium.
C. Probably some tanking character that mixed a Chapter a Tactics or was Driago for Gate. BB changes prohibit.

So, you're making your decisions based upon broken things which have been fixed cleanly and simply. When we look at what the unit can actually do when not abusing bad rules which have been fixed, it's just fine. Everything in context.

This is exactly why Instarted this project.

Sure, direct comparisons, but we also have to make those within the scope of this Errata. Comparing to non aerated Broken 40k is out of context.

My problem is that I have no clue how BA would fare against these grav centurions. Sounds silly, but I really don't. Better, sure, but how much better?

Martel732 wrote:
My problem is that I have no clue how BA would fare against these grav centurions. Sounds silly, but I really don't. Better, sure, but how much better?

Exactly,mall of your comments are colored by your extremely harsh and competitive Meta. It's been in your forum posts for years, all advice is colored by it and can't see past the red rage the imbalance brings.

Do you think you could talk one of your opponents to run a list under the Errata against you under the Errata. Once I get the BA preliminary done which is just me sitting down,mtyping, and going through everything I've done and organizing it. I feel that would be an eye opening experience for you.

Or ask them to simply field them without a Grav Star. Changes are your opponents will flat out refuse, because they'd be massively handicapping themselves, because they are using highly I balancing and unintended combinations.

Edit:
And the answer is significantly better.

I'll try to find someone.

Martel732 wrote:
I'll try to find someone.

Good. Sorry about the typos in the last couple of posts, I ran home for lunch and was using my tablet.

What I am saying it you can't judge a unit so harshely when you've only seen it abused in a way that is no longer eally possible. Sure, a Tiggy/Marneus or Tiggy/Captain America Grav Star will still be a very strong and tough unit, but under these Errata it cannot achieve the game breaking power it could have before through abuse. For instance, they would be choosing between a 75% chance of Invis, or a 75% chance of Gate, a Mobile or highly durable start. If they choose Gate, the Star can be killed, and almost every army has the tools required to do it if they play well, if they choose Invisibility it can still be killed but more likely it can be Kited and the range can be avoided or closed upon. If they don't invest in a tank, they are a single Demolisher Cannon round away from losing most of the unit. Remove the broken combinations that battle brother brough hugely balances the game, the differences that are left are much smaller and can be addressed. Gotta take these changes in context, which is within the Scope of this balance errata.

Once we've removed that massive imbalance the gap between SM and BA begins to narrow, and this is without even addressing the unique BA units or their lack of Chapter Tactics. Every step like this improves balance, and that is what we are after.

I looked at the Tau thread. In general, I like it, but with reduced centurions, I'm not sure how marines ever kill Riptides. I didn't see the FNP option for them removed, nor the nova shield.

What a surprise! I was myself working on some erratas for 40k and was planning to post them on the forum soon to get some thoughts and help but you were faster than me! Since we share the same goal I'll just post a link to download my version of the Space marines codex, unfortunately it's only in french for the moment and isn't quite as finished as I would like it to be since I kinda froze the project when I learnt that GW was making a new one. I hope you won't mind me posting my stuff here but I'd find it pretty redundant to have multiples topic on the same subject of balancing 40k. Keep in mind that it's only half finished and that a lot of things are imbalanced at the moment (sternguard are a bit too much imo in my version).

http://www.partage-fichiers.com/upload/6xfq32ft/

Here's some screens for people who don't want to DL the whole thing :



I'm currently working on an update on the chaos space marines codex and I'll post a more detailed comment again later since I need to go at the moment.

Keep the good work man.

Martel732 wrote:
I looked at the Tau thread. In general, I like it, but with reduced centurions, I'm not sure how marines ever kill Riptides. I didn't see the FNP option for them removed, nor the nova shield.

Probably best over in the Tau thread.

I've gone over the Riptide quite extensively in the past. The base HBC Riptide is actually quite balanced, the NOVA reactor will average 2 Wounds to it over the course of a 6 Turn Game, and its damage output at BS3 is not steller, averages only 5ish S6 hits per turn. The Damage output isn't that great either for its cost. The problem with the Riptide was not its chassis, or the HBC, or even its NOVA shield. It was the Ion Accelerator upgrade being only 5pts and eliminating the need to use the NOVA Reactor. Now Early Warning Override costs 20pts for a Riptide. And it was AP2 with a Large Blast. The other broken thing was the Early Warning Override being 5pts, even worse when combined with the IA, which that combination is not not nearly as good and costs 30pts instead of 10 for a gun that isn't as good, way better balance. The Stim was fairly balanced, further increased durability at the expense of more diluted firepower per point. Who cares if its tough, usually its damage output isn't that high and its Chassis is spot on what a Dreadknight is, just serving differetn roles. With the changes I made to the Ion Accelerator the Riptides is pretty balanced, and the need to NOVA for AP2 is huge. For cost, Two Ion hammerheads will put out better firepower for around the same cost and and be just as durable against most armies.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Aenarel wrote:
What a surprise! I was myself working on some erratas for 40k and was planning to post them on the forum soon to get some thoughts and help but you were faster than me! Since we share the same goal I'll just post a link to download my version of the Space marines codex, unfortunately it's only in french for the moment and isn't quite as finished as I would like it to be since I kinda froze the project when I learnt that GW was making a new one. I hope you won't mind me posting my stuff here but I'd find it pretty redundant to have multiples topic on the same subject of balancing 40k. Keep in mind that it's only half finished and that a lot of things are imbalanced at the moment (sternguard are a bit too much imo in my version).

http://www.partage-fichiers.com/upload/6xfq32ft/

Here's some screens for people who don't want to DL the whole thing :

Spoiler:

I'm currently working on an unpdate on the chaos space marines codex and I'll post a more detailed comment again later since I need to go at the moment.

Keep the good work man.

Very interesting, though I don't know if you can have those posted due to IP rigth ad images as such. But, once this project gets further I'd hope to find someone with your skill to make pretty looking Erratas, very well done. Our Tactical Squad modifications are spot on, though I don't know if you changed Special and Melee WEapon prices at all.

And I'd worry about how your Captian on a Bike with THunderhammer and Stormshield and artificer armor would be. Definitaly got cheaper, don't know if that was needed on the base Captain.

Very interesting, though I don't know if you can have those posted due to IP rigth ad images as such. But, once this project gets further I'd hope to find someone with your skill to make pretty looking Erratas, very well done. Our Tactical Squad modifications are spot on, though I don't know if you changed Special and Melee WEapon prices at all.

And I'd worry about how your Captian on a Bike with THunderhammer and Stormshield and artificer armor would be. Definitaly got cheaper, don't know if that was needed on the base Captain.

Actually my version cost the same as it is in the GW codex since I changed the bike price to 30 points to balance the points drop of the captain. My thought was that a foot captain is pretty bad at the moment and was worthy of a point reduction. On the other hand the biker captain was okay so I didn't change the final cost. It's listed in the pdf that you can donwload in my previous post. The 3 pictures I posted are only a very small part of the thing, my codex is 60 pages long so it's a bit much to post directly in the forum. Download it if you're curious, most of the changes are tentative changes (and in french unfortunately) but some feedbacks are definitely welcomed (on the balance or the design).

In your erratas I noticed that you changed the White Scars tactics but didn't touch the others. According to me the Ultramarines, Imperial Fists and Salamanders tactics are perfectly fines as it is but the the Black Templars, Iron Hands and Raven Guard ones are underwhelming imo. I don't really like what you did to the White Scars (it's still too strong imo, I'd prefer to let them keep Skilled Riders and remove Hit and Run). Though honestly I don't really know what to do witt them, maybe give Hit and Run to jumpack units of the Raven Guards (and perhaps a 4th Fast attack choice). I tried giving the Black Templars a rule that allowed them to make a bonus 1D6 movement when they suffer a loss during the ennemy psychic or shooting phase in the direction of an ennemy unit but that could be abused to flee from units trying to charge you and restricting the movement to the closet ennemy would be abused by shooting army. So I came to a dead end.

You nerfed the grav weapons which is good and needed but I don't think it's in a good way since they're still better plasma gun imo and have the same niche. Make them AP3 and remove the ridiculous auto immobilised dammage on the vehicles.

I'd also like to see the chainsword get a PA5 and maybe make the assault canon a bit more badass with a Heavy 5 or even 6 profile (with the according point cost of course). I liked what you did with the heavy bolter, I made them Salvo 2/4 in my version (but still 10 points) but yours is fine too. And make the assault bolter Assault 3!

Making the dreadnought HP 4 is something I didn't think of but that's actually a pretty nice idea!

What do you think about making the assault terminators, vanguard veterans and honour guard WS5? I think that would help them a bit and would reflect their experience in close combat since as it stand they're as skilled as a devastator which is something I always found odd.

Assault Centurions also need a major rework according to me since at the moment they have more or less the exact same role as the terminators but I'm clueless about what to do with them.


And don't hesitate to ask if you need to give your rules some graphics, I used InDesign to do mine. Took me 10 days to do 60 page so it's quite fast in the end.

"You nerfed the grav weapons which is good and needed but I don't think it's in a good way since they're still better plasma gun imo and have the same niche. Make them AP3 and remove the ridiculous auto immobilised dammage on the vehicles. "

Then 2+ armor MCs have to go.

Martel732 wrote:
"You nerfed the grav weapons which is good and needed but I don't think it's in a good way since they're still better plasma gun imo and have the same niche. Make them AP3 and remove the ridiculous auto immobilised dammage on the vehicles. "

Then 2+ armor MCs have to go.

That wouldn't actually be a problem since there is only the Riptide and maybe an upgraded Daemon prince who are 2+ MCs if I recall correctly. As it stands I feel the gravitron is just too good at everything. His only real weakness are tough models with a gakky save but that's not really something you see a lot this days (except chaos spawn). Killing terminators or things like that should be the plasma's job but the gravitron actually does it better and can still destroy any vehicles pretty decently (two 6 = 3 hull points).

Aenarel wrote:

Very interesting, though I don't know if you can have those posted due to IP rigth ad images as such. But, once this project gets further I'd hope to find someone with your skill to make pretty looking Erratas, very well done. Our Tactical Squad modifications are spot on, though I don't know if you changed Special and Melee WEapon prices at all.

And I'd worry about how your Captian on a Bike with THunderhammer and Stormshield and artificer armor would be. Definitaly got cheaper, don't know if that was needed on the base Captain.

Actually my version cost the same as it is in the GW codex since I changed the bike price to 30 points to balance the points drop of the captain. My thought was that a foot captain is pretty bad at the moment and was worthy of a point reduction. On the other hand the biker captain was okay so I didn't change the final cost. It's listed in the pdf that you can donwload in my previous post. The 3 pictures I posted are only a very small part of the thing, my codex is 60 pages long so it's a bit much to post directly in the forum. Download it if you're curious, most of the changes are tentative changes (and in french unfortunately) but some feedbacks are definitely welcomed (on the balance or the design).

In your erratas I noticed that you changed the White Scars tactics but didn't touch the others. According to me the Ultramarines, Imperial Fists and Salamanders tactics are perfectly fines as it is but the the Black Templars, Iron Hands and Raven Guard ones are underwhelming imo. I don't really like what you did to the White Scars (it's still too strong imo, I'd prefer to let them keep Skilled Riders and remove Hit and Run). Though honestly I don't really know what to do witt them, maybe give Hit and Run to jumpack units of the Raven Guards (and perhaps a 4th Fast attack choice). I tried giving the Black Templars a rule that allowed them to make a bonus 1D6 movement when they suffer a loss during the ennemy psychic or shooting phase in the direction of an ennemy unit but that could be abused to flee from units trying to charge you and restricting the movement to the closet ennemy would be abused by shooting army. So I came to a dead end.

You nerfed the grav weapons which is good and needed but I don't think it's in a good way since they're still better plasma gun imo and have the same niche. Make them AP3 and remove the ridiculous auto immobilised dammage on the vehicles.

I'd also like to see the chainsword get a PA5 and maybe make the assault canon a bit more badass with a Heavy 5 or even 6 profile (with the according point cost of course). I liked what you did with the heavy bolter, I made them Salvo 2/4 in my version (but still 10 points) but yours is fine too. And make the assault bolter Assault 3!

Making the dreadnought HP 4 is something I didn't think of but that's actually a pretty nice idea!

What do you think about making the assault terminators, vanguard veterans and honour guard WS5? I think that would help them a bit and would reflect their experience in close combat since as it stand they're as skilled as a devastator which is something I always found odd.

Assault Centurions also need a major rework according to me since at the moment they have more or less the exact same role as the terminators but I'm clueless about what to do with them.


And don't hesitate to ask if you need to give your rules some graphics, I used InDesign to do mine. Took me 10 days to do 60 page so it's quite fast in the end.

We had similar though, my Bike upgrade got more expensive, but the Captian stayed the same. I don't read French so it's a bit of work for me to get through. Haha, thankfully there are Latin roots!

Yes, Chapter Tactics still need some work for the not so great ones, mainly Black Templars.

Plasma is now cheaper than Grav and has a longer range.

I don't think they need WS5, a cost drop was enough IMO for balance.

I didn't think the weapons needed much change, just some re costing.

I thought 4HP solved most of their issues without massive points drops, especially for AV12.

I didn't want to major rework of a unit, lighter hand the better. Revisiting should be enough.

Martel732 wrote:"You nerfed the grav weapons which is good and needed but I don't think it's in a good way since they're still better plasma gun imo and have the same niche. Make them AP3 and remove the ridiculous auto immobilised dammage on the vehicles. "

Then 2+ armor MCs have to go.

There is plenty of of AP2 out there for the two 2+ MCs, and only the Dreadnight is competent in assault.

And Grav is still more expensive and shorter range than Plasma.

Aenarel wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"You nerfed the grav weapons which is good and needed but I don't think it's in a good way since they're still better plasma gun imo and have the same niche. Make them AP3 and remove the ridiculous auto immobilised dammage on the vehicles. "

Then 2+ armor MCs have to go.

That wouldn't actually be a problem since there is only the Riptide and maybe an upgraded Daemon prince who are 2+ MCs if I recall correctly. As it stands I feel the gravitron is just too good at everything. His only real weakness are tough models with a gakky save but that's not really something you see a lot this days (except chaos spawn). Killing terminators or things like that should be the plasma's job but the gravitron actually does it better and can still destroy any vehicles pretty decently (two 6 = 3 hull points).

If we do the math for cost, Olasma just got a lot better in comparison to Grav, expect ally against light AV. And 24" range is useful. With the cost difference it's an actual choice now.

Sorry about short responses, road tripping across Midwest with GF to meet her family.

"There is plenty of of AP2 out there for the two 2+ MCs, and only the Dreadnight is competent in assault. "

But you need so much against the Riptide. And the Riptide is far from incompetent in assault, assuming you can ever catch the thing before it kills you.

Martel732 wrote:
"There is plenty of of AP2 out there for the two 2+ MCs, and only the Dreadnight is competent in assault. "

But you need so much against the Riptide. And the Riptide is far from incompetent in assault, assuming you can ever catch the thing before it kills you.

The Rriptide has to avoid everything that isn't a naked tactical or vehicle on assault. Anything CC oriented tears it up.

It only has one more wound than the Dreadlnight and costs 50pts more base. Trading a gun and mobility for CC. Once the Nova is factored in the Riptide is less durable than the Dreadnight on the table. Why so much hate for the Riptide? Also, the Tyranofes is also a T6 2+ in the same price range with ranged S10...

"Once the Nova is factored in the Riptide is less durable than the Dreadnight on the table. Why so much hate for the Riptide?"

Because it easily avoids CC and easily stays out of the range of most weapons that can engage it effectively. It can't be compared to the Dreadknight because the Dreadknight always moves into the teeth of the opponent's guns, whereas the Riptide is nice and safe out at lascannon range. In my experience, Dreadknights die MUCH faster than Ritpides. No option for FNP, no access to 3++, and as I mentioned earlier, has to move within plasma, grav, melta, bladestorm, and wraith cannon range to be effective. So mathematically you may be right, but no Tau player is going to expose the Riptide to the kinds of threats that the Dreadknight must face.

"The Rriptide has to avoid everything that isn't a naked tactical or vehicle on assault."

Not exactly. The Riptide is far from helpless in CC, as it is an MC, GW's favored unit for the last two editions. It gets free AP2 and is almost impervious to common melee attacks. Marine assault squads can't handle it, either. I guess they can tarpit it, but that's far different from being helpless.

I think 2+ armor MCs are overpowered in general, but the Riptide is super bad because it is a long-range firing platform. With pie plates of doom.

Martel732 wrote:
"Once the Nova is factored in the Riptide is less durable than the Dreadnight on the table. Why so much hate for the Riptide?"

Because it easily avoids CC and easily stays out of the range of most weapons that can engage it effectively. It can't be compared to the Dreadknight because the Dreadknight always moves into the teeth of the opponent's guns, whereas the Riptide is nice and safe out at lascannon range. In my experience, Dreadknights die MUCH faster than Ritpides. No option for FNP, no access to 3++, and as I mentioned earlier, has to move within plasma, grav, melta, bladestorm, and wraith cannon range to be effective. So mathematically you may be right, but no Tau player is going to expose the Riptide to the kinds of threats that the Dreadknight must face.

"The Rriptide has to avoid everything that isn't a naked tactical or vehicle on assault."

Not exactly. The Riptide is far from helpless in CC, as it is an MC, GW's favored unit for the last two editions. It gets free AP2 and is almost impervious to common melee attacks. Marine assault squads can't handle it, either. I guess they can tarpit it, but that's far different from being helpless.

I think 2+ armor MCs are overpowered in general, but the Riptide is super bad because it is a long-range firing platform. With pie plates of doom.

And the Riptide doesn't have that high of a damage output. Miss secondaries, at least FB and PR pull them in close. The Dreadknight can easily be upgraded to the Heavy Psicannon for 165pts, 15pts cheaper, massively better in CC, only 1 fewer wound, but no Nova Reactor draining 1 wound every three turns, and averages 4 S7 Rending hits vs 4 S6 or 6S6 Rending hits.

The 3++ is a trap and rarely advised. FNP is costly and dilutes firepower per point. The IA as I stated before was too good, mainly because it took away the need to Nova. I'm fixing that.

Seriously, if the Riptide is just moving around away from anything important and you don't close on it, that's a mistake. Anything ties them up or beats them in CC, their damage output is low, much lower than say a Leman ruse per point, in general, and is comparable at range. It's Tau, close on them and kill them. Don't let them sit at range and shoot you.

You hate 2+ MCs, but if you want the Riptide as a 3+ it needs a sizable drop in cost because T6 3+ isn't good. It boils down to the HBC Riptide is quite balanced and doesn't need much work, the IA and EWO upgrades were undercosted. I've fixed the EWO, and make the IA less effective and make it slightly more expensive. That should be enough to.

And this is the SM thread, please discuss the Riptide in the Tau thread. Though, if you'd like to discuss the Dreadnights costing, we can do that.

I don't have much to say about the Dreadknight. Never had any problems with them. They shunt in, and get killed. A lot. Maybe they should be a little cheaper. I hear Xeno players complain about it a lot, though. Hard to say.

" T6 3+ isn't good."

Beats the hell out of anything the BA have.